Avw

You may be referring to the previous President of Iran not the incumbent who they say is a "kindly old man".

You therefore haf to tell your boss bwana Netanyahu.

"If Israel can't stand a regular nuking, get outta dah Middle East".

I understand there is some land to rent in Tasmania.

Nice weather. Fewer fights.

Rhrosty:

It doesn't take a genius to figure out from your first post that your opinion of David's article is quite negative, what exactly you were objecting to was not clear however. I am glad you have now clarified your objection.

"Perhaps we need to wait just a little longer, to see if the east and west can reach a workable agreement with Iran..."

How much longer do you propose we wait? We have already been waiting for over a decade, while Iran continues to advance towards becoming a nuclear power. Would you suggest we wait another decade? By then none of this would matter because Iran would have achieved its goal and be able to threaten any of its neighbours with annihilation.

"...before we bomb them..."

Bombing should be the very last resort. Continued and escalated sanctions are very likely to convince the Iranian regime to give up their nuclear ambition (or else risk a coup d'etat), making any bombing campaign unnecessary.

"There's a much bigger picture here, and much more important than the survival of a single imposed occupying nation..."

I assume you are referring to Israel here, but we can argue the 'occupying nation' term elsewhere where it's more relevant to the discussion. You are absolutely correct, a nuclear armed Iran will be a danger to the entire ME, which explains why many Arab states are now lining up against Iran and are calling for the sanctions to continue. This is exactly why we need to put more pressure on Iran to stop this madness, rather than allow the negotiations to go on indefinitely while they continue to develop the bomb.

Pete:

I'm not sure whether the current president of Iran is a "kindly old man" or not, what I do know is that he is largely irrelevant in determining Iran's policies. Policy is dictated by the unelected Ayatollah of the day, regardless of what any president says. We all know what he is pushing for, but just in case you have any doubt, here it is again:

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2014/11/09/iran_s_khamenei_israel_must_be_annihilated.html

Hi Avw

All is complex and personalised, like Israel and Australia. The comparative status of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and President http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hassan_Rouhani depends on many more factors than official powers.

Naturally relations between the Iran and the US are important. The Army of the Guardians of the Islamic Revolution (Iranian Revolutionary Guards) would be considered a terrorist outfit by Israel. However Iran with its Revolutionary Guards Special Forces (directing Shiite militia) are recognised by the US as the most effective ground forces against IS in Iraq and Syria.

It is quite obvious that Netanyahu is frustrated that the US now considers Iran, its Revolutionary Guards and Shiite militia's, as valuable allies - though not in Yemen, of course.

The US also sees a nuclear armed Iran as inevitable - when not if. A nuclear armed Iran is not only a regional deterrence balance against nuclear Israel. It also a balance against the nuclear potntial of the Saudis. The Saudis have financially supported Pakistan's nuclear program for decades. The deal is if strategic tensions rise the Saudis can place Pakistani nuclear warheads on the ballistic missiles the Saudis bought from China.

See Saudi issues towards the end of my 2014 home sigint collection article mainly concerning Iran http://gentleseas.blogspot.com.au/2014/01/iranian-nuclear-program-iranian.html .

Regards

Pete

#Rhrosty and #plantaganet

Even President Obama is now belatedly expressing doubts about the "understanding" with Iran - as this following news item makes clear.

"Obama admitted that "there are a lot of details to be worked out, and you could see backtracking and slippage and real political difficulties, both in Iran and obviously here in the United States Congress."

Speaking more generally, he said, "If in fact we can resolve these issues diplomatically, we are more likely to be safe, more likely to be secure, in a better position to protect our allies, and who knows? Iran may change." The nuclear negotiations, he said, are "this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity."
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/obama-deal-with-iran-in-trouble/article/2562737?utm_campaign=Washington%20Examiner:%20Opinion%20Digest%20PMI&utm_source=Washington%20Examiner:%20Opinion%20Digest%20PMI%20-%2004/09/15&utm_medium=email

I wonder if the good President indeed read this article in OLO

Get a life boys.

The Iran understanding is becoming less understandable with every passing day.

Shooting the messenger and ignoring the message is making you both look increasingly out of touch.

What is scaring Israel is that relations between Iran and the US are becoming closer. Iran's Revolutionary Guards, who direct Shiite militia, are recognised by the US as the most effective ground force against IS in Iraq and Syria.

The US also sees a nuclear armed Iran as inevitable - when not if. A nuclear armed Iran is not only a regional deterrence balance against nuclear Israel. It also a balance against the nuclear potential of the Saudis. The Saudis have financially supported Pakistan's nuclear program for decades. The deal is if strategic tensions rise the Saudis can place Pakistani nuclear warheads on the ballistic missiles the Saudis bought from China.

See Saudi issues towards the end of my 2014 home sigint collection article mainly concerning Iranhttp://gentleseas.blogspot.com.au/2014/01/iranian-nuclear-program-iranian.html .